ChenMiaoi wrote: > > Could you clarify the expected benefit of this change? In particular, I'm > > not sure that adding a constructor solely to enable emplace_back is > > worthwhile here. Do you have any measurements showing a performance > > improvement? > > Motivated solely from the FIXME in the code and yes the performance should > not really be much as the seen from usual benchmarks of `emplace_back()` vs > `push_back()` but I believe it would be better to use `emplace_back` where it > makes sense for its benefits > > I can try to get some performance benchmarks for this change in a while as > I'm currently not sure how to benchmark this
I missed the FIXME earlier. With C++20, we could switch directly to emplace_back without adding a constructor. However, LLVM currently requires C++17, so I think it would be better to wait until C++20 becomes the minimum requirement. Otherwise, we would be adding a constructor solely to enable emplace_back, only to remove it once we adopt C++20. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/232260 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
